New state law treats video voyeurs as sex offenders

Those convicted of secret tapings can be registered

May 25, 2010

Written by

Jim Collar

Post-Crescent staff writer

About this two-day report

In light of the case of Jamie Sames of Shakopee, Minn., charged with sexually assaulting a teenage girl in March outside Fox River Mall in Grand Chute, The Post-Crescent reviewed cases charged under Wisconsin's privacy invasion law in Outagamie and Winnebago counties to gauge the justice system's handling of so-called Peeping Tom behavior. Today, in the second part of a two-day series, "Voyeurism: Who's watching?," the newspaper reveals its findings. Read Sunday's report on www.postcrescent.com.

More

ADVERTISEMENT

It's an age-old crime that's taken on far more dire consequences in a high-tech era.

Victims of peeping behavior once dealt with the emotions of being peered upon by a lone criminal.

Today, a lone act of victimization could reach computer screens around the world.

(Page 2 of 3)

"That's where the Internet has made the consequences of this criminal activity incredibly frightening for victims," said Ian Henderson, attorney for the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault. "Once something is on the Internet, it's hard to get it off."

As of March 18, Wisconsin judges were given the ability to brand those who secretly take and distribute nude videos and photos of others as sex offenders.

Wisconsin lawmakers this year eliminated an inconsistency in the state's privacy law as it pertained to so-called video voyeurism. Gov. Jim Doyle signed a bill into law that allows judges to place those offenders on the Wisconsin Sexual Offender Registry.

Judges were given the same authority for window peepers and those who used surveillance devices to peer in on people in 2003. The invasion of privacy crime is a misdemeanor offense that carries a maximum penalty of nine months in jail and a $10,000 fine.

Those who not only look in, but also take photographs or video footage could be charged with felony offenses carrying maximum 3˝-year prison sentences. Before passage of the new law, however, that felony crime didn't include a registration provision.

State Rep. Ted Zigmunt, D-Francis Creek, was author of the bill. He said he began to explore the issue of the Internet and privacy law based on a Waukesha County case against 19-year-old Anthony Stancl.

Stancl, who posed as a female on Facebook, persuaded teen boys to send nude photos, then used those photos as blackmail to get them to engage in sex acts with him.

Zigmunt hopes the registry provision will drive home the seriousness of violating privacy, particularly among young people who might not have a full appreciation of the power of the Internet.

"Hopefully, they'll think twice before trying something like that, knowing that it's against the law and there are serious consequences," Zigmunt said.

Doyle signed the video voyeurism bill on March 3.

Less than two weeks later, a federal judge gave a 2˝-year prison sentence to an Illinois insurance executive in what has arguably become the most infamous video voyeur case.

(Page 3 of 3)

Michael Barrett was sent to prison for shooting 10 videos of ESPN personality Erin Andrews through rigged hotel room peepholes.

The case brought FBI investigators to Milwaukee. While none of those videos that reached the Internet were filmed in Wisconsin, Barrett had a room at Milwaukee's Radisson Airport Hotel on the same day Andrews had a reservation. The peephole in the room in which Andrews stayed was rigged in a similar fashion to that in the hotel where a majority of the videos originated, charging documents say.

While the Barrett case brought the issue to the forefront, the Fox Valley has also had examples:

In 2004, Cecil B. Lewis of Appleton was ordered to serve an 18-month prison sentence for taping sexual encounters with six women without their knowledge.

Gary Fahey of Appleton was given a jail and probation sentence in 2006 after a video camera was found in the restroom of his metals distribution business. Police located a videotape with 202 instances of women and one man either using the toilet or changing clothing.

Fahey is on Wisconsin's sexual offender registry, but not based on the videotape. After police seized his computer, officers found child pornography.

Wisconsin's video voyeurism law is a felony crime if committed while the person is nude in a circumstance in which he or she has a reasonable expectation of privacy. It's a misdemeanor if it's committed in a locker room.

The law specifically prohibits making and distribution of violating images. The new law includes a provision that requires judges to remove juvenile offenders from the Wisconsin Sex Offender Registry upon completion of their sentences for video voyeur offenses.

Advocates say the law makes sense.

Tony Gibart, policy director for the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence, testified on behalf of the bill last year before the Assembly Committee on Corrections and the Courts.

Those who violate another with a video camera belong on the registry, he said, because they steal dignity and show no regard for privacy.

"It's the type of characteristics you see in other sex offenses," Gibart said.